Government Documents Research

by Moya K. Mason

Abbott-Hoduski, Bernadine E. "Democracy in America is Best Served by a Multiformat Federal Depository Library Program." Journal of Government Information 23, No. 3 (1996): 241-252.

If democracy is dependent upon the government providing equitable, free, and easy access to its information resources, then the Federal Depository Library Program must be considered an integral component of the government's dissemination machine. Since 1895, the FDLP has had depository libraries act as its conduit for providing access to information from all three branches of the government to the public, and as educators of the populace. The basic principles of the FDLP are as follows: 1.) libraries have volunteered to become depositories and to provide the public with free access to government information, 2.) they can select the information they want in a particular format, 3.) federal agencies decide which format to offer their publications in, with input from libraries, staff, and primary clientele, 4.) regional depositories are committed to the provision of long-term access and archiving of selected materials, 5.) Congress oversees and funds the program.

Problems that libraries must face:

1.) Representative Charlie Rose and Senator Wendell Ford made electronic information part of the FDLP through the GPO Access Act, making it free to depository libraries, but now that Congress is has stipulated that all government information will be in electronic format, what will libraries do? Will they sit calmly by and accept the extra costs involved with dissemination in electronic format only, and give up acid-free paper copies and microfiche? Will they continue to fight for multiple formats? Through the years, access to multiple formats have dwindled away for certain publications such as congressional bills which since the 1980s have been in microfiche only, as has the "Foreign Relations of the United States", along with many others. Still other publications such as the "Monthly Catalog of U.S. Government Publications" have been issued on CD-ROM, but libraries must choose either the paper or the CD-ROM product and cannot have both. This is problematic because the electronic version has eliminated subject, author, and title indexes, and the paper version has been greatly reduced in size, thus demanding that both be used in conjunction with the other. Although the depository program asked that microform and electronic formats be included in the system to access fugitive documents, they never saw them as replacements for print publications.

2.) Congressional efforts to control costs -- have meant limiting the public's access to paper publications, driving up the price of paper copies, and created more demands to reduce paper publications: a vicious circle. As printing was reduced and staff reduced from 8000 in 1976 to 4000 in 1995, Congress continued to battle for cuts to publications in paper. If Congress is successful in eliminating all paper products, the costs will shift to depository libraries, which may then begin to charge users with printing costs to recoup some of the money. And these libraries are essentially local and state libraries which have taken on the task of disseminating federal government information, so is it fair that local and state governments pay for the shortfalls? A report released in 1988 estimated that libraries spend ten dollars to provide access to government information for every dollar spent by the federal government on depository appropriations. Congress has also used the FDLP as a means to force federal agencies to publish in electronic format. They have done this by cutting the Superintendent of Documents Salaries and Expenses funds by half, requiring that the cuts could be made up by forcing federal agencies to pay for the production of their paper and microfiche publications themselves to distribute to the depository system. Congress did not care if the printing process bypassed the GPO, and stated that the dissemination of electronic information would be funded by the GPO if disseminated to the libraries in the program. They said that electronic information would be cost effective, promote resource sharing, and save space in libraries. However, agencies have their own financial woes to struggle under, and are not budgeting for publications to be sent to the depository program. What this means is that libraries can forget about paper copies, since agencies do everything they can to circumvent the FDLP.

3.) Electronic Information as the sole format: problems with only electronic distribution -- 1.) The long-honoured principal of providing a client with information in the format they want it in. For example, if important health or education information for the public is being disseminated, then colourful illustrated paper publications are in order; hikers will need maps; while staticians may want electronic formats. Format should depend upon the user group involved like it always has. If government is advocating that they know more about what the public wants, one must ask the basis for this assumption. More likely, Congress does not care about whether the information can be used or not, it simply wants to save money. 2.) What happens when the electricity goes out? Computers crash and the Internet doesn't work. This creates real problems for certain kinds of government information. For example, agricultural statistics are available for only a day, a week, or a month. Is there a preservation component built into the system? The GPO Access Act directs GPO to provide storage for electronic information, but if they don't get the information, they cannot archive it. 3.) There is also the consideration that since electronic data has not been in existence for a long time, there is no knowledge concerning its lifespan. And there have been cases when documents have been written over to save money at GPO.

4.) Data quality and authenticity of government information on CD-ROMs and online.

5.) The most important reason against a hundred percent electronic universe for government information is that it prevents many users from having access to important government information. From lack of technological finesse, lack of money to buy the necessary equipment, to lack of training, there are many reasons why individuals will be prevented from having access. Furthermore, many depository libraries do not have the needed equipment, the infrastructure, nor enough trained staff to facilitate the transition to electronic government information.

Adler, Prudence S. "Federal Information Dissemination Policies and Practices: One Perspective on Managing the Transition." Journal of Government Information 23, No. 4 (1996): 435-441.

Information providers, including libraries, are going through rapid change due to budget pressures and an onslaught of new information technologies, technologies which are changing the way the public gets their information needs met. For example, in 1995, the U.S. Bureau of Census got 60 000 'hits per day' on their website; GPO Access provides no-fee access to the "Federal Register", congressional bills, and the "Congressional Record"; and the Library of Congress began THOMAS, a service that allows access to congressional information, a site that gets roughly 78 000 hits per day.

Factors contributing to changes in the way government disseminates information: 1.) the existence of information technologies, and their growing use in federal agencies, as well as by users who like the convenience that home access brings them. 2.) The need to downsize and reduce government spending has moved government towards electronic information to save money. The only problem seems to be that the costs will be transferred to the public and to institutions such as libraries. 3.) Al Gore has called for major changes in the structure of government, and in particular, downsizing, and decentralization of procurement and printing, coupled with electronic information. 4.) Clinton Administration Initiatives -- revision of OMB Circular A-130 and the 1993 Information Infrastructure Task Force Report have increased the access to government information through the use of the Internet, and by shifting the responsibility for agency information onto the agencies themselves, thus decentralizing government information. 5.) Congressional Initiatives -- as the 104th Congress came to a close, legislation was introduced that called for federal information dissemination programs to be restructured. As well, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 was passed in both houses. 6.) Library Community Initiatives -- libraries around the country have begun a series of meetings, pilot projects, and experiments in providing access to government information. Information flowing out of the Dupont Circle Group (April 26, 1993), and the Chicago Conference on the Future of Federal Governmental Information (October 29-31, 1993) identified some important points to consider: 1.) If FDLP is going to survive, there needs to be an effective framework from which information can be accessed. 2.) Cooperation is needed between government and libraries. 3.) New dissemination programs require interim measures. 4.) The desire to keep no-fee access for the public.

Many collaborate projects are weighing dissemination strategies, and include: 1.) The U.S. Agricultural Information Network is interested in preserving and providing access to pre-1950 core agricultural historical literature. 2.) The Agricultural Network Information Center is a source of electronic agricultural information, and designed to provide access to academics, subject specialists, government researchers, agribusiness, and the public, to name a few. It uses a system of international agricultural databases, and has a mediated reference service and a directory of nonbibliographic databases. 3.) The Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC) is a consortium of twelve major research and teaching universities, which is exploring three areas: Digitizing printed government information; network access to Geographic Information Systems data; and how to provide network access to government information on CD-ROMs and tape files.

Aldrich, Duncan M. "Depository Libraries, the Internet, and the 21st Century." Journal of Government Information 23, No. 4 (1996): 381-391.

In 1995, both the United States Bureau of the Census and the Bureau of the Census issued notices stating that many of their information products would no longer be released in print or microfiche formats, and instead, they would be available on the Internet in order to provide greater access. These announcements reflect the new ideology that the federal government has in regards to the dissemination of information which will allow it to cut costs. "Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich called for an electronic democracy that would provide for immediate access to all federal legislation via the Internet"(p. 382). Prior to using the Internet for dissemination, the government sent all its information to the GPO which distributed it to the federal depository library program for public access. Chapter 19 of Title 44 of the United States Code stipulates that all federal government agencies use the services of GPO as printer for their microfiche and print publications, and requires that GPO act as a distributor of that information to depository libraries, which in turn provide the information to the public. The policy statement also requires that roughly every state have a regional depository library to store the documents forever. What will happen to the system as more and more government information is solely in electronic format?

Aldrich calls the new model "the Internet e-mail order model" (p. 382), whose main characteristic is "direct distribution of federal information resources from producing agency to end user"(p. 383). Federal agencies post their information onto homepages, bypassing the GPO altogether, and seemingly, they can do so legally due to a grey area in 44 USC 1901, saying that it never included electronic information. Therefore, the FLP is cut from the middle of the equation, so where is it left? Four basic functions of federal depository libraries must be examined: 1.) If information is all electronic, will there even be a need for the program? Yes, since the public will still need geographically dispersed depositories to access archival materials, as well as new materials issued in CD-ROM format, microform, and perhaps even paper. The other reason is that not everyone has access to computer technology at home or in their offices; most people do not and will not anytime soon. Internet access is another problem. 2.) If documents are electronic, will regional depositories be needed for archiving? There will still need to be places to store the traditional forms of government information and new materials such as CD-ROM products. Of course, there is no expectation that all the electronic information will be downloaded, printed, and stored, as well as redundant if all fifty regional libraries were to be archival sites. It is more likely that the National Archives will set up programs to do so, and have the capabilities to provide access to the public through existing depositories. Currently, it is not known if agencies are archiving the information they put onto their websites. 3.) Will depositories need to exist to promote access at no charge? That is very up in the air, especially since federal agencies have been mandated to recover the costs of distributing information, and as a result, many federal websites and bulletin boards are not free. Examples include the Department of Commerce's Stat-USA or FedWorld sites. And although many other agencies offer free access to their homepages, one has to wonder how long that will likely continue as the novelty wears off. Still others, charge individual users, but provide one or two passwords free to depository libraries. If this continues, depository libraries will be integral components for the dissemination of government information, but if not, any library can access the information, making depositories unnecessary. 4.) Will users need assistance from reference librarians and value-added services? The question that could be asked is will users know which site to visit for particular information? (see note #1) Users are not always knowledgeable about where to look for information and can waste a lot of time searching websites. Patrons have always had problems looking for information in government print sources, so why will that change? At the very least depository librarians can offer expertise in searching and retrieving, as well as data management issues and bibliographic tools. Someone will have to train users to navigate the Internet, databases, and even GILS, which can get most individuals close to where they want to go, but assistance is required for novices at present. (My question is, if depository libraries fade away into the sunset, will government continue its no-fee access to information? Good question!!)

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

1. And that is where knowing the structure and organization of government comes into play. How many people are familiar with it?

Aluri, Rao. "Improving Reference Service: The Case for Using a Continuous Quality Improvement Method." RQ 33, No. 2 (Winter 1993): 220-236.

Note: This is undoubtedly one of the most important articles you will read. It has great depths of insight, and you should strongly embrace and reinforce the ideas herein if you want to be a hero for librarianship.

Improving reference service should naturally flow out of reference evaluation, however, many libraries have used a variety of evaluative techniques to benchmark their facility, without ever taking the next step. Aluri believes that successful improvement of reference service must integrate a systems perspective, have a view to the long term, and include a win-win ideology. He also believes that a number of variables affect any simple reference transaction, including:

  1. The physical environment of the reference area, such as distance between desk and collection.
  2. Communication - how members of management, technical services, support staff, and reference librarians communicate, affects the reference process.
  3. The reference collection - its depth and accessibility.
  4. The reference librarian - the level of education, subject specialty, experience, competence, willingness, and enthusiasm, among other components, do affect how well a reference transaction will take place.
  5. The totality of demands on a reference librarian - which can include substantial involvement in research, BI, outreach programs, professional development, and faculty liaison.
  6. The level of library technology and access or lack of access to online databases and networks.
  7. The quality and extent of library technology.
  8. Staffing resources.
  9. Expectations of management.
  10. Library and management policies.
  11. Practices and philosophies of reference service that are in place.

Before any improvements can be made to the quality of reference service, it must be realized that "[w]hat was missing from these discussions was a systems view of the reference process, and the recognition that library managers, who have management responsibility for the reference system, are equally, if not more, accountable for the quality of the reference process" (p. 221).

As much as it can be acknowledged that many evaluations of reference service are/were carried out by outsiders to the system (including consultants, doctoral students, and faculty researchers), and these offered but a snapshot or episodic picture of the quality of reference service on a particular day, it must also be pointed out that for reference service to be improved, the process must be initiated by those who are directly involved and can be achieved only through continuous effort and support of the participants. There is also a problem with the mentality of blame: all over the world, it is always the workers who are blamed for problems and shortcomings in service, instead a using a systems perspective to review shortcomings. Isn't it true that when accuracy rates for reference transactions hover near 50%, only the front-line librarians are found to be at fault? One must review the system to find the components that result in poor quality service. Why not start at the top with library administration?

"Library administrators hold primary responsibility for the system. It is management's policies and procedures, its departmental organizations, its rewards and punishment systems, and its three-pronged performance evaluation in academic libraries (library service, community service, and research) under which reference librarians labor" (p. 224). Is it fair then, to lay all the blame on reference librarians and punish them, especially when administration often takes the best of them off the desk to do committee work and special projects, refuse to provide the funds for training, continuing education, while they push for publication? Especially when lengthy interview procedures and examination of resumes help managers to hire the cream of the crop in the first place?

Of course, none of these realities absolves reference librarians of their inherent responsibility of giving the best service possible, however, unless a healthy environment is provided, what can one expect? What needs to be done is for both managers and librarians to collect data on a long-term basis, and begin to identify the root causes behind the problems, so as to eliminate them through a complete systems review of the reference process.

What can be done to improve reference service?

  1. Identification of key measures for the qualitative measuring of reference service. Key measures are such things as timeliness, accuracy, quantities, comprehension, and responsiveness. Monitoring will reflect the degree of reference quality.
  2. Collection of data on a long-term basis, using checklists.
  3. The use of control charts to plot the data.
  4. Control chart interpretation.
  5. Isolation of key problems using Pareto charts.
  6. The identification of root causes by employing 'cause and effect' diagrams.

The improvement of reference service is a long-term process that requires the use of quality improvement tools (including control and Pareto charts, brainstorming sessions, and 'cause and effect' diagrams), cooperation across the board, teamwork, and a systems view of the process.

Andrews, Judy, and Lucy Duhon. "GILS, Government Information Locator Service: Blending Old and New to Access U.S. Governmental Information." The Serials Librarian 31, No. 1/2 (1997): 327-333.

1. The United States depository library system is made up of 1400 libraries. Their mandate is and has always been to provide the public with access to federal government information, and to keep it stored. In 1994, there were 101.8 million government documents distributed by the GPO, ranging from short pamphlets to those hundreds of pages in length. As the federal government is now using the Internet and electronic publishing to disseminate its information, there is a great need to organize it. One of the strategies has been the development of the Government Information Locator Service (GILS), which has come out of the work done in large part by Charles McClure, of Syracuse University. Using studies that looked at how the public accesses and uses government information, conducted by McClure, Ryan, and Moen, and their report called "Identifying and Describing Federal Information Inventory/Locator Systems: Design for Network-based Locators", (see note #1) they designed a network-based locator for government information, and initiated the legislation to put it into operation. The initial idea for GILS was a result of a model for the United States Geological Survey developed by Eliot Christian.

2. An excerpt from the important document written by Clinton and Gore in 1993:

"Every year the federal government spends billions of dollars collecting and processing information...while much of this information is very valuable, many potential users either do not know it exists, or do not know how to access it. We are committed to using new computer and network technology to make this information more accessible to the taxpayers who paid for it....federal information is [to be] made available at a fair price to as many users as possible while encouraging growth of the information" (p. 329). (see note #2)

3. In 1993, P.L. 103-40, a public law, established that the GPO would be the means by which federal government electronic information would be accessed by the public by funneling it through the depository library program, capping a battle which had been fought since the Reagan administration. It also mandated that electronic format would be the means of storing federal government publications.

4. At the same time, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), published Circular A-130, "Management of Federal Information Resources", which encouraged federal government agencies to provide the public with access to their publications, regardless of format. There are 108 major federal government agencies in the United States, which have the expertise to organize, disseminate, and set fees for the information they produce, and that is why a policy of decentralization is necessary; individual agencies will be the ones able to provide the most accurate information available about their departments. In addition, it called for the use of finding aids, such as catalogs and directories to enhance access, stipulating that fees would not exceed the cost of dissemination.

5. In September, 1993, the National Information Infrastructure Task Force released a document entitled "Agenda for Action", with the provision for public access to government information being one of its objectives. It also suggested that there be a 'virtual card catalog' set up to indicate whether or not certain information was available.

6. All of these steps laid the groundwork for the implementation of GILS.

7. OMB Bulletin 95-01, a furtherance of Circular A-130, described the functions of GILS as: 1.) an identifier of federal government publications, 2.) to provide descriptions of available information, 3.) assist users in accessing the information they want, 4.) help to improve the management practices of federal government agencies in relation to electronic information, 5.) the basis of GILS' structure will be decentralized agency-based locator records, which use easily available technological products that will enable the information to be stored and retrieved through a multitude of sites and ways, 6.) Internet access should be free, but particularly for depository libraries.

8. There are still many issues to consider concerning GILS, including whether it should be tied to the Z39.50 standard. Although the model calls for decentralization, doesn't there need to be some sort of standard applied? And what about the problem of archiving? Who should control GILS ? The White House and Congress have come to no agreement.

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

1. McClure, Charles R., Joe Ryan, and William E. Moen. "Identifying and Describing Federal Information Inventory/Locator Systems: Design for Network-based Locators", 2 vols. (Bethesda, MD: National Audio Visual Center, 1992).

2. Clinton, William J., and Albert Gore, Jr. "Technology for America's Strength: A New Direction to Build Economic Strength." (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, February 1993).

Andrews, William J. "Nurturing the Global Information Commons: Public Access, Public Infrastructure." Government Information in Canada/Information gouvernementale au Canada 2, No. 3.1 (1996). Available: www.usask.ca/library/gic/v2n3/andrews.html

Andrews points out that although 'Electronic Highway' and 'Information Highway' are used interchangeably by many people, they are two very distinct terms. 'Electronic Highway' is actually the software and hardware infrastructure that enables communications to take place and is built with the help of engineers and information technologists, while 'Information Highway' is the actual communication that takes place. These distinctions are quite important when considering public infrastructure and access: public access to 'Electronic Highway' encompasses such things as whether to use cable or telephone lines for connectivity, wires, and fibre optic cables, while public infrastructure of the 'Electronic Highway' refers to who pays for it and who owns the wires that make up the structure. While this whole area of controversy is very important to consider and focus on, the thrust of Andrews' paper is with three key issues affecting the Information Highway, namely:

  1. how pricing of electronic government information will be established.
  2. how the government will use the Information Highway.
  3. how the public will use the Information Highway in regards to government matters.

Pricing of Government Information: public service or corporate asset?

"Computerization greatly facilitates the commodification of information. Once information is in electronic form it is relatively easy (i.e. cheap) to package it and to distribute it. Also, it is easier to make it useful (i.e. valuable) to a much wider array of potential users (i.e. customers) than the users for whom information was originally created" (p. 2). With the reduction of government budgets in all Western governments, and the pressures to recover some of the revenues used to collect and disseminate government information, there is a trend towards the commodification of information because information is a valuable resource. The problem with that mentality is 1.) there is typically an overestimation of the actual profits that can be commanded from the sale of government information, and a correlating underestimate of what it actually costs government departments to do business in the information world. The overestimation comes from including revenues they obtain from selling information between departments, which is often overlooked. 2.) since the governmental agencies are in fact monopolistic suppliers of information, they will increasingly take advantage of this position as time goes by, and eventually will have to come under a regulatory board so that prices do not hinder the democratic process of universal rights to access of information. 3.) computerized government information is sold using the system of high-price, low-volume, meaning that information does not have to be marketed beyond a very visible circle of 'must-purchase' clients. In reality, this approach does not allow non-commercial users to purchase information, and leaves little room for an expansion of sales. The example used by the author is the $600.00 the British Columbia government charges for a file of digital maps, covering no more area than its $10.00 paper maps. This literally excludes groups such as educators, students, individuals, and environmental groups from having access to the information, leaving it solely for logging and mining companies, or other governmental agencies. 4.) "This raises the fourth problem with the sale of computerized government information, which is the fundamental public policy question of whether the distribution of government information should be treated as a source of revenue or as a public service" (p. 3). The Information Advisory Council's Final Report sees a business approach being the best one for the information highway, although not necessarily for the government to act as a model for this approach, which can be seen in the free access they have provided for many federal statutes and regulations available full-text on the Internet.

Government's Use of the Information Highway: there have been several positive steps in this direction, including the fact that the federal and provincial governments have Internet sites, which contain great amounts of serious information besides tourist-oriented materials.

Use of the Internet in Relations to Government: the public is beginning to use the Internet in ways that relate to government matters. Some examples are: grassroots environmental Internet sites; British Columbians using the Internet to allow the world knowledge of their views of the Gustafson Lake occupation; and major newspapers posting sites on issues such as the Quebec referendum. It is all about building a community of users.

Bailey, Bill. "The "55 Percent Rule" Revisited." The Journal of Academic Librarianship 13 (Nov. 1987): 280-283.

The Journal of Academic Librarianship put out a symposium on the accuracy of reference service in its May 1987 issue, which provided the findings of work done by Hernon and McClure and their 55% rule. Reactions from a reference librarian are chronicled here.

  1. Although the research of Hernon and McClure has caused a stir and their 55% rule entrenched in library literature, Bailey believes that it is questionable because of inherent problems associated with unobtrusive testing.
  2. Problems include the use of proxies, whose reported findings were taken as the gospel truth by Hernon and McClure. Bailey has difficulties with this because no two people see the same thing in the same way. As well, he believes that personal biases are hard to overcome, stating that "[t]he crotchety librarian, unfortunately, is an American icon. Finding proxies free of preconceived notions about librarians would be a difficult task" (p. 280). Use of a second observer to verify what the proxies said took place would take care of some of the problems.
  3. Random errors could also attribute to the low accuracy rate of reference service: 1.) For instance, the time the questions were asked has an impact: What if it was during a shift change? Or before lunch? 2.) Were the people who were asked the questions always professional librarians, perhaps some were paraprofessionals. (see note #1) 3.) What if some of the people answering questions were in training? (see note #2) 4.) The fact that library policies might affect the ability of librarians to answer questions to the best of their ability, such as not being allowed to leave the desk for too long.
  4. He also believes that testing people without their knowledge and permission to be a questionable practice, stating "that surreptitious observation eventually will uncover flaws in even a paragon of professionalism. Hernon and McClure could have tailed the brightest reference librarians until they finally gave out wrong answers. None of us can claim to be on top of things at every moment" (p. 281).
  5. The questions used by the researchers tested their ability to answer government documents inquiries, and if their answers were not 100% accurate, they got no credit. If the librarian simply directed the proxy to a suitable source, they got no credit.
  6. The proxies were told to try and get the librarian to do more than direct them - they were to goad them into giving an answer, but in many libraries, a librarian won't give direct assistance of that sort until a patron has at least tried to help themselves. Bailey believes that the proxies should have at least pretended to try, and then come back for more help because most librarians would than be more forthcoming.
  7. How about if a follow-up study had been done the next day when perhaps a less busy, less harried librarian would have answered correctly or could answer an unanswered question from the day before? A second unobtrusive study using deans secretaries or heads of corporations would have been beneficial because the librarians would have been pressured into trying harder and would therefore, not be painted as ignorant. (see note #3)
  8. Because Hernon and McClure stated that any amount of time under five minutes was too short a time for librarians to spend with a given patron, it has precipitated the belief that librarians have an internal clock ticking away and that it is a deficit to good librarianship. Bailey disputes this by saying the best librarians need only a very short time to comprehend and answer a question, and the longer they take, the less likely that the outcome will be accurate.
  9. The indexing of government documents is certainly not thorough, and finding information can be quite frustrating for the librarian.
  10. The test questions were not reflective of those usually asked by patrons.
  11. By using questionable test methods and then extrapolated the results to paint a picture of all librarians is unfair, as is the research becoming a rule in the literature.

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

  1. That could be true, but when librarians do not want to wear name tags to identify themselves as a professional, it is hard to tell. Don't they want to be responsible for the answers they give? And if library administrators are allowing large numbers of students and paraprofessionals on the desk, then they will have to take responsibility for that decision. If they want their librarians doing so many other tasks that keep them off the desk, they will have to take responsibility.
  2. Shouldn't they then be wearing a tag which says they are in training? Even McDonalds and Wal-Mart does that to inform their customers.
  3. Shouldn't students or the regular Joe off the street be treated with the same amount of respect and be provided with the same effort that dean's secretaries and business people get? Ludicrous!!!

Birbeck, Vaughan P., and Kenneth A. Whittaker. "Room for Improvement: An Unobtrusive Testing of British Public Library Reference Service." Public Library Journal 2, No. 4 (July/August 1987): 55-60.

This study covered "twenty-four English public service points" (p. 55), and used unobtrusive methods to determine the quality of reference service offered over the telephone. It was the first time unobtrusive testing was used to evaluate British libraries in a full scale survey. Reasons for the study were three-fold: 1.) With the financial restraints and cutbacks evident in libraries, it is increasingly necessary for evaluation of services. 2.) Since answering questions is at the heart of librarianship, this aspect must be evaluated. 3.) Traditionally, reference work has been evaluated on the basis of quantitative methods, but how many questions reference librarians answer cannot reflect the quality of the answers given to patrons. As s result, qualitative methods of evaluation must be used. This was chosen over obtrusive evaluation because "Their results are, in fact, likely to be typical of the quality of the answers being given by a library's staff to its enquirers" (p. 56).

The findings were comparable to previous studies carried out in the U. S. and were: 1.) 47% for wholly correct 2.) 9% for partially correct 3.) 17% for wholly incorrect 4.) 27% were referred 5.) "only a fifth of them resulted in an incorrect answer being given" (p. 56) (see note #1) 6.) The mean time for answering the questions was 5.5 minutes. 7.) statistical analysis concluded that the longer a librarian spent answering a question, the higher the accuracy.

The unobtrusive test was supplemented by doing an obtrusive test to see if any differences were found. The results were: 1.) More care was taken by the librarians when answering the questions, and some even wrote them down. 2.) the mean time was 6.3 minutes. 3.) the librarians had a higher accuracy rate when compared to the unobtrusive results. 4.) If librarians know they are being tested, it is virtually impossible for them to perform normally.

Brandon, Peter, and Jens Laursen. "A Discussion Paper on Improving Public Access to Information about Government Services and Sources of Information." Ottawa: Information Management practices, Treasury Board, 1992.

The underlying message of this discussion paper is that Canadians need more access to government information and an increased awareness of the services and programs available to them. "There is evidence that these clients' ability to obtain information about services available and sources of information is limited by the combines effects: of uncoordinated provision of access services; of fragmentation among the sources for such information; of diffused responsibility for providing such information; of the form of presentation of the information, often not adapted to the audience; of inconsistencies among departments in inventorying and providing access to such information" (p. 2). Of course there is Reference Canada and the Guide to Federal Programs and Services, but these are not well-known by the average Canadian because of little promotion by the government. Brandon and Laursen propose that there are ways the government can greatly improve access to government information, particularly through an inventory/locator service (government-wide information and services locator system, or GISL), more promotion of existing tools, and by providing multi-modal access services (available through telephone, electronic formats, and face-to-face mediated service). Face-to-face mediation can be achieved by promoting the services offered by depository libraries in this country. All improvements will require specialized training for the personnel who offer mediation between the public and government information so as to develop a sophisticated and comprehensive system. One of the underlying criticisms the government has to greatly improving access and awareness to information sources lies in the fear that it would substantially increase requests, and overload an already overextended system. However, through utilizing depository libraries, developing neighborhood kiosks, enhancing government outlets, extending hours, and providing better telephone referrals, that should take care of problems associated with the 'fe ar of suc cess' syndrome.

"An effective GISL system could be established as the single collection point and single source of such information on a government-wide basis. This would reduce the effort, save resources, improve the accuracy of the information available on topics, and reduce the number of data calls on departments. An effective GISL system would require a government-wide thesaurus or controlled vocabulary" (p. 4). Such a system would be beneficial for the following reasons: 1.) the public would be provided with a fairly sophisticated locator and referral system, 2.) offer the capability for 'one-stop-shopping' for government information, and 3.) bring about a reduction of information calls to individual government agencies and departments.

To build and implement such a service, the government would have to work and coordinate with the private-sector and develop a series of guidelines, standards, and a framework, as well as providing access to government information. In addition, success can only be expected if government departments contribute information and begin to show some progress in inventorying their information resources.

Background points to keep in mind:

  1. Society is moving from a traditionally industrial economy to an information age, making time and place obsolete due to computer technologies and telecommunications.
  2. The information sector is the fastest growing sector of society, with information becoming an important and valuable commodity.
  3. The globalization of international markets can be directly attributed to the force of information.
  4. Increasingly, computer literacy is becoming a very important requirement; without such skill, there will be a widening of the gap between the 'haves' and 'have-nots'.
  5. Is government concerned that a knowledgeable pool of citizens will become empowered and more demanding of information and services?
  6. Answers are needed to the following questions: who are users of government information? what kinds of information interests them? how would they prefer to receive it? is the public concerned about lack of access to government information? how does the public perceive the levels of services they are currently receiving?
  7. There has been a trend toward the decentralization of government.
  8. Electronic access should be provided in a variety of ways, including public access to a data network, online, at government offices, in libraries, and through e-mail.
  9. The private-sector will play a major role in the dissemination of government information in the future.

Brandon, Peter. "The Internet Myth: A Model for More Activist Government in a Knowledge Society." Government Information in Canada/ Information gouvernementale au Canada No. 14. Available: http://www.usask.ca/library/gic/14/brandon.html

Brandon has set out to show that the Internet will not automatically transform our society into one which is proficient in information technologies. He calls it the 'Internet myth', arguing that its very existence cannot be equated with the development of citizens who are technologically savvy in a knowledge society. He uses the mythology behind the Gutenberg Printing Press and what he calls the 'Hippocrates myth' to dispel this ideology.

Many believe that it was Gutenberg's press which transformed the illiterate world to a society with high levels of literacy. Not true says Brandon. "Indeed, the numbers indicate that literacy actually exploded not alongside the printing presses (literacy rates merely "bubbled upward" as output and affordability of printed texts grew impressively), but in the wake of some remarkable changes in both the idea and the social reality that people are equal within a human community. These changes, sparked by the spirit embodied in Jefferson's famous words, "all men are created equal", initiated significant social actions, the most remarkable of which was state-sponsored elementary public education" (p. 2). It was the combination of equality for everyone and a free public school system which made illiteracy rates dramatically decline.

The other myth saw scientific advances in medicine as being credited for the substantial improvements in the state of public health in the 19th and 20th centuries. Brandon argues that it was actually new government laws such as the Public Health Act and the Nuisances Removal and Disease Act that made such a big difference because these made it possible for the government to disinfect houses, isolate sick and infected individuals, implement street cleaning, and generated a campaign of propaganda for higher levels of physical education in schools, increased domestic and personal hygiene, and cleaner working place conditions. In addition, the government developed statistical committees for the collection of disease and demographic statistics, and the dissemination of public health information, seen in such publications as the Handbook for U.S. Public Health (1915). "Determined government action in this case helped shape public attitudes. In turn, these attitudes, combined with further government action and statistical and medical advances, led to accelerated increases in the levels of public health (at least in the Western World)" (p. 3).

Both examples show that enlightened attitudes and government action were in large part responsible for dramatic changes in society. Brandon contends that it will not be the Internet which will transform society into a knowledge society, but government action and enlightened social attitudes, with help from the Internet. It will take determined government action to ensure that there is universal access to public knowledge: public knowledge is a national asset the government has a responsibility to provide access to for its citizens because it has social value that can enhance the quality of life. Without the access to public information, individuals cannot become consequential and productive members of society, and "discharge their citizenship obligations and prosecute their interests in a knowledge society" (p. 8). The author also makes the point that Crown Copyright was created to ensure that the Crown administer and guarantee information for the benefit and use of the people governed, not for the benefit of the Crown, with government responsible for providing free access so as to expand society's knowledge base. Therefore, the activist government would ensure that public information is accessible. But how?

The author sees the second pillar for a more activist government to be the creation of a Canadian universal public knowledge delivery model, inspired by the Canadian Health Act. Brandon believes that the right to public information is complementary to the mental and physical well-being of Canadian citizens. The Act ensures access to health, just as a Canadian Public information and Knowledge Act would ensure that Canadians have a right to public information, an inherent right. He calls this proposed system 'Knowledge Care' and its "rationale is that the informational and knowledge health of Canadians is fundamental to governance in and functioning of an effective democracy underpinning a successful information society… Knowledge Care is an implement of the Information Age, where the ability to acquire, use and apply information and knowledge is the single most important source of comparative advantage, competitiveness, productivity, and, ultimately, wealth" (p. 11).

A charter for Knowledge Care should include, among other things:

  1. the facilitation of an informed public, who can participate in governance of an open information society.
  2. the provision for an equitable level of government and public information, with delivery from public libraries, kiosks, government offices, depository libraries, and Canada Business Service Centres.
  3. information should be generated, collected, archived, disseminated, and managed as a public asset by the government.
  4. the public should have adequate access to this asset.
  5. access should not be hindered by time, format, secrecy, or cost.
  6. accessibility should be facilitated by a government locator or reference system, with points of access and mediation when needed.
  7. a combination of private-sector and public resources should be used to offer access.

Operationalization should be on a non-profit basis, overseen by some public authority, with the Information Commissioner acting as ombudsperson, with the Privacy Commissioner protecting Canadians' privacy rights.

The government must remember that "[n]o technology-not even the Internet-will bring about desirable social outcomes on its own. The Internet will not, by itself, beget an informed population and participatory democracy any more than Gutenberg's printing press can be credited with creating mass literacy, or than advances in medical science and apparatus can be held solely responsible for the current state of public health. What ultimately brings about an "informed participation society" are (1) enlightened social attitudes and (2) corresponding government action" (p. 15).

Brandon, Peter. "Enhancing Public Access to Government Information." (July 31, 1998).

The government is committed to offering Canadians common delivery points and one-stop shopping for federal government services. Is it possible?

Currently, impediments include: reluctance to offer better service, for fear that it will overwhelm already limited resources; a lack of inventorying in certain government departments; trouble locating information sources; incompatible information formats; no provision for coordinated access; and no minimum standards set by the federal government.

Access currently comes principally through government white pages in the telephone book; InfoSource; Reference Canada; Guide to Federal Programs and Services; and the government telephone book. Dissemination outlets include: the Depository Services Program; Statistics Canada; post offices; government information networks, such as the National Business Information network and the Canadian Heritage Information Network; constituency and MPs offices; departmental reading rooms; and regional and district offices of federal departments. Provincially agencies such as Access Ontario, Communications Quebec, Newfoundland Information Services, and BC Online are centers for government information dissemination. Municipal offerings include Acces Montreal.

Short term options for improving access to federal government information: 1.) more user-friendly telephone directory government pages, 2.) improving the quality and public access to Reference Canada, 3.) enhancement of InfoSource's electronic system by combining its database with information from Reference Canada and the resources of the Guide to Federal Programs and Services. This new InfoSource system could provide services ranging from telephone access, face-to-face access (through libraries, government outlets, and federal departments), and electronic access, offered directly or through gatewayed networks, and public kiosks.

Longer term options to improve access to federal government information may be through: 1.) the creation of a government information and services locator system, with access to FAQ, descriptions of services offered by federal agencies and departments, abstracts and citations of government information resources, and names/phone numbers of where service and information can be obtained. A locator service could also provide telephone, face-to-face, and electronic access to government information.

Brown, Janet Dagenais. "Using Quality Concepts to Improve Reference Services." College & Research Libraries (May 1994): 211-219.

Librarians must provide high quality reference service if they are to expect repeat business from their users. The reference department at the Wichita State University Library was interested in improving the service they provide, so they decided to conduct a complete evaluation. Good reference service should include accurate and timely answers provided in an efficient manner, using a responsive system of delivery. Guidelines have been set down by the American Library Association and are combined with the individual philosophies of the librarians themselves. However, there are no set methodologies for the delivery of reference service; difficulties in measuring the perceptions of users; and "they do not really offer practical direction" (p. 212).

Customer satisfaction or quality services are as important as the accuracy of the answers given. Much work has been done in this field, with prominent studies carried out for the business world by W. Edwards Deming, Joseph M. Juran, and Philip B. Crosby. All three believed that a commitment to quality must come from the top down, with empowered and involved employees working in an organization that is customer-driven and interested in improving the quality of its service.

  1. Deming - is synonymous with 'Total Quality Management' (TQM), which calls for managers to provide leadership, constancy, training, retraining, eliminate employee fear, and breakdown the barriers that exist between departments in an organization. If a manger can succeed, quality will flow throughout the organization.
  2. Juran - is popular for his 'Quality Trilogy', a set of guidelines for managers.
  3. Crosby - is known for his fourteen-point guide for managers called 'Quality Improvement Process', stating that mangers need to concentrate on improving quality with training and the expectation of high standards.

Libraries and their staff must concentrate their efforts on the delivery of their services, with customers always in mind because "[w]hat the consumer experiences during this contact with the service provider has been called the "Moment of Truth," a phrase coined by Swedish airline magnate Jan Carlzon…Reference librarians will encounter many of these moments of truth during each shift at the Reference Desk. How well these moments are managed will determine how satisfied our customers are with our service" (p. 213).

If these 'moments of truth' are not properly handled, library users can feel frustrated and leave with negative feelings for the librarian and the library itself. They certainly will not be eager to come back again too quickly. To find out how well the reference librarians were doing with 'moments of truth' at the Wichita State University Library, the library initiated a series of four projects, hoping to find out who their users were and if their needs were being met.

  1. Problem Log - a problem log was set up at the reference desk to receive complaints from a full range of library users. What they learned was that there were some very distinct categories of problems, including technical computer problems, lack of signage, lack of one-on-one instruction, and the need for more database instruction.
  2. Suggestion Box -a box was mounted on the wall of the reference area, and included comments such as: requests for more vending machines and telephones; concerns about library policies; problems with library finding aids; and suggestions for making library use easier for patrons.
  3. Wisconsin-Ohio Reference Evaluation Program - to find out how accurate they were being at the reference desk, how patron needs were being met, areas to improve, and who their users were, the library decided to use an obtrusive survey, developed by Charles Bunge and Marjorie Murfin. The important aspect of this assessment instrument is that it allows a library to compare itself with other participating libraries of the same kind. Wichita's results: 1.) overall, they scored very well, 2.) users found their staff to be courteous and knowledgeable, 3.) they scored extremely high with graduate students and freshman, 4.) found that the reference department spent less time answering questions than other academic libraries, and 5.) that users often reported that given the busyness of the desk, they felt they were not allotted enough time with the librarians.
  4. Reference Automation Quality Circle - this final phase was initiated to find out how librarians could become empowered, do their job better, and what their needs were. 'Quality Circles', based on the work of Deming and Juran, are made up of small groups of employees coming together on a regular basis with a supervisor to address a particular problem, such as the computerization of library services. They found that there were a series of problems associated with the computer equipment in their area, and that they would have to assign more staff hours to correct them.

What they learned from this experience, was that improving the quality of reference service must be a continuous process, and carried out by all members of the staff.

Buchwald, C. 1995. "Canada in Context: An Overview of Information Policies in Four Industrialized Countries." Information Policy Research Program, Faculty of Information Studies. Working Paper Series No. 2. Toronto, ON.

Points made:

  1. There are extreme pressures on national governments to comply with international trends and global markets.
  2. North American and European countries want to be prepared to compete in a global economy that is increasingly run by transnational corporations, and are actively developing the information infrastructures to do so.
  3. Canada, the United States, the U.K., and France are creating information policies on intellectual property, universal service, privacy, access, and freedom of expression for consideration at both the international and national levels.
  4. Canada, the E.U., France, and the U.K. have accepted that their information infrastructure should be developed by private industry, with some assistance from government.
  5. Canada and France are reorienting their information policies toward a commodification or market-driven approach.
  6. The Americans, with their large number of transnational corporations are changing information policies and moving in the direction of deregulation and liberalization, while at the same time, private-sector corporations are still depending upon assistance and protection from governments in most countries. "Transnational corporations expect governments to ensure fair competition, according to a self-serving definition of the free flow of information. In the U.S., the government has fought continuously for the international free flow of information on behalf of U.S. industry. The Canadian government (occasionally) protects vulnerable cultural industries from U.S. competition. In the UK., the government has supported the PTT and broadcasting. In all countries, assistance comes to the private sector in the form of grants, subsidies and preferential regulations" (p. 1).
  7. Governments need the private sector to build information infrastructures and in exchange, are making policy concessions to transnational corporations and providing funding to industry. As a result of trying to harmonize national with international, "national governments are relinquishing authority over much of their previous policy domain in information technology and services" (p. 2).
  8. These compromises on information policy, coupled with international pressures, will continue to create changes in future information policies; how far Canada will go towards the market-driven approach and how much this environment will change our society is something that will become apparent with time.

Bunge, Charles A. "Evaluating Reference Services and Reference Personnel: Questions and Answers from the Literature." The Reference Librarian, no. 43, 1994, pp. 195-207.

The evaluation of reference services is an important aspect of library work, and "should be guided by the reference service's overall philosophy, mission, goals, and objectives" (p. 197) Ultimately, which evaluation method a library uses is dependent upon what they are trying to find out about service or resources. As Robbin-Carter and Zweizig point out, libraries should not be asking "How good are we?" but rather one that attempts to answer the question, "Are we there yet?" (p. 197-198) (see note #1 and #2) They have established a model which Bunge has found useful for the evaluation of reference service. It is a process of question answering:

  1. What do we want to know about?
  2. Where do we want to be?
  3. How will we know if we are getting there?
  4. How close are we?
  5. So what?

What next? For our study, what we want to know about is the dissemination of government information, how it is being transmitted to the public, and how much librarians working in reference know about the structure of the government in general. Where do we want to be? With improved reference service for patrons asking government documents questions, and for librarians to feel more comfortable answering them because of additional training. How will we know if we are getting there? Libraries must use some evaluation method, to set a benchmark. Or as the author says, "In fact, an important purpose of the "first round" in an ongoing evaluation process can be to establish benchmarks that can be used in establishing objectives or targets for the future" (p. 199) That is what the proxy study ultimately did. Any number of methods can be used depending upon the size of the study, how much work a library wants to put into it, and how much resources they have to carry it out. Methods such as peer review are getting lots of attention in the literature as a way libraries can evaluate themselves. How close are we? This can be answered using statistical analysis of the data after it is collected, making sure not to over-generalize the findings. (see note #3) What does it all mean? So what? There must be an identification of factors that are affecting the level of accomplishment in any particular reference department. Poorly answered questions could be symptomatic of many different factors such as lack of reference materials, inexperienced librarians, or lack of interviewing skills. In our case, it is perhaps indicative of morale problems, cutback of appropriate staff, having the least qualified reference librarians on the floor, or lack of training regimes for searching electronic resources such as the Internet. What next? This is the process of moving from evaluation to improvement. (see note #4) The implication of more training for librarians so that they can keep up with t he new technologies and how to get around the problems associated with shrinking budgets and layoffs.

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

  1. See Robbin-Carter, Jane, and Douglas L. Zweizig. "Are We There Yet?" American Libraries 16 (October, December 1985): 624-27, 780-84.
  2. I think that librarians everywhere should keep this in mind. Instead of being defensive of criticisms of their work, they should be more interested in the improvement of library service. Certainly, a win/win situation is established if librarians can offer friendly, professional service with a high rate of accuracy. There is too much competition out there for us to sit on our laurels and not be the best we can be. Gandhi said, "We must be the change we envision in the world." How true, how true.
  3. We must make this point as well. The study is not the be-all or end-all. It is just a small window onto a very complicated process of disseminating government information in a time of upheaval and transition.
  4. You may decide to have the last section of your book consider this question. Discussion of fairly new methods of evaluation such as peer review and its implications and drawbacks could be included. Coupled with this I believe should be more of an emphasis on librarians working together - if you don't know something or where to find something, ask your co-workers. Then it is win/win for everyone. Without a strong last section, there can be no hope, and that is the life blood of every negative situation. Even something as small as the insistence that gov docs librarians have a chart at least which shows them the layout of government structure if they don't want to learn it themselves. She is right, if we understand the structure, librarians can answer questions much easier. My idea of a template initiated by the Federal Depository Program for easier access of government information could be discussed at this point as well. Ah, the future may be so bright, we will have to wear shades, eh?

Campbell, Jerry D. "Shaking the Conceptual Foundations of Reference: A Perspective." Reference Services Review (Winter 1992): 29-35.

"I'm sorry I looked into the whole thing, I mean reference service in libraries and a new economic model for reference. I was aware that if I addressed the topic of reference, some might see this as the misguided effort of an administrator from the lunatic fringe to meddle in something he didn't know anything about, and I was prepared for that. I also knew that I would encounter a sacred cow or two among the reference pastures. I was somewhat less prepared, though not undone, to encounter a whole herd. I was, however, totally unprepared to find the ostensibly straightforward notion of reference service to be virtually in conceptual disarray" (p. 29).

What does this mean? It means that it is almost impossible for anyone, other than a practicing reference librarian, to understand what it means to be a reference librarian, understand what it is they do on any given day, and how much they do, or should be doing. With no clear mission statements available for reference librarians, and much controversy over studies that claim reference librarians have major problems with providing accurate answers to patron requests, it is little wonder that conceptual disarray reigns. One can assume they do a variety of tasks which include the staffing of reference desks, the answering of questions, BI, the development of subject bibliographies, professional development, academic research, and collection development, with the central role presumed to be the answering of reference questions, but is it? And what kinds of questions do they answer?

A review of the literature offers some insight by explaining that reference librarians get asked two very different types of questions: directional and substantial, and that there is no cohesion amongst reference librarians as to what the major features of their work are, or their central role. For example, some librarians believe that bibliographic instruction stands as the central and the most redeeming role they play in the provision of reference service, while others see the desk as their whole universe. There is even discernible dissension amongst librarians over the role that paraprofessionals should play in libraries, and certainly no agreement on the what constitutes a good economic model for reference. With no clear picture available, and apparent conflict between old and new practices, Campbell felt the best way to proceed was to begin with a redefinition of reference.

What is reference? It can be broken down into two fronts: one technological, the other, conceptual.

Technology and Reference:

  1. With the number of reference inquiries growing, as the loss of staff continues to increase, the answer is to utilize computer automation, but how? By breaking reference questions down into categories, a strategy can be developed. The author offers the following categories of questions: "technical help for reference hardware/software-university events, calendar, library hours-directional questions-user/library problems-research questions-reference/factual questions-bibliographical/source questions" (p. 31). All are ordered according to the amount of time it takes for a librarian to provide an answer, thus, the first category takes the least amount of time, while the last, takes the most. It is obvious that certain types of questions found in the above categorization, do not have to be answered by face-to-face interaction with a librarian. The telephone, signage, the posting of maps and technical instructions, and the development of pathfinders are other ways in which certain types of reference questions can be answered. Why not add the computer? Campbell believes that the first three categories easily lend themselves to automated reference service, a practice that could save ten percent of a staff's time. Although other categories of questions are not so easily adaptable to automation, "[i]n fact, computer technology clearly holds the capacity to assist in all seven categories, and this is one key to a new reference model" (p. 31). Perhaps the goal should be to allow seventy-five percent of reference questions to be answerable without human intervention, by computer technology, and accessible at offices, homes, and dorm rooms. Campbell sees reference librarians' "central mission of making accessible our collective human memory" (p. 31) as something that needs to be continued, and whose quality and quantity can be increased, by using technological solutions. Campbell believes that librarians are self-destructing. To change the direction of the tide and to ensure the survival of lib rarianship, he insists that r adical changes need to be made, and for starters, transference of seventy-five percent of our reference questions to a computer intermediary, is a good place to begin.
  1. Conceptual Foundations - as the number of users grow, and their expectations increase, offering service in the traditional, face-to-face largely print-based model, is becoming outdated rarely quickly. "Who will be the information providers of tomorrow? Will librarians have a role? Our concept of reference must change. We cannot afford to refer; we must provide. "Reference" is the wrong name. Its meaning is outmoded; its connotations are obsolete" (p. 32). Libraries will need to be prepared to offer patrons rapid service, with delivery in electronic form.

Campbell proposes that reference librarians change their title to 'Access Engineers', and be willing to perform three essential tasks: 1.) Knowledge Cartography - being aware of all new sources of information and establish access links between them and users, 2.) Consumer Analysis - the ability to analyze and understand the information needs of users, 3.) Access Engineering - facilitate the transfer of information from its source, directly to the user.

Canada. Federal Task Force on Digitization. "Digitization in the Federal Government." April 1997. Available at http: www.nrc.ca/dtf-gtn/english/discpap.htm

Canadian Heritage and Industry Canada jointly established the Federal Task Force on Digitization so as to: 1.) to highlight the importance of providing digital information, 2.) to make provisions to allow federal departments and agencies to create information in a digital form, 3.) to develop the strategies needed to offer access to Canadian digital information.

The Information Highway Advisory Council (IHAC) was created in May of 1994, and had as its mandate, "the examination of a wide variety of issues relating to the Information Highway" (p. 10). In September, 1995, its final report was published, with inclusion of three hundred recommendations for consideration. The government responded with Building the Information Society: Moving Canada into the 21st Century, and development of a plan to have a strong Canadian cultural presence on the Internet, and the creation of an environment that would stimulate research and development, the encouragement of new services, and open standards of dissemination. The basis comes from a belief that "the process of creating, converting, marketing, distributing, and exporting digital Canadian content creates not only increased access, knowledge, and awareness but also fosters many opportunities for innovation, wealth, and job creation within the Canadian and multimedia industries" (p. 1). As a result, Industry Canada and Canadian Heritage created the Federal Digitization Task Force (DTF) to examine the issues and mechanisms required for Canada to have a presence on the Information Superhighway. To do this, the task force had to determine the extent to which digitization of information is utilized in federal departments, establish an environment that enabled consumers, producers, and distributors, and propose a strategy that enabled free, tax-supported access with those that generated revenues from value-added information products.

To date, there is no government--wide strategy in place for the digitization of government information, but instead, a series of pilot projects operating on a departmental basis. No coordination across the board, no central inventory of the digitization work, and no mechanism in place to exchange information between departments. Before a roadmap for digital information is developed, the creation of an inventory structure must be developed. One idea is to use an environmental scan of departments to collect information on the objectives, scope, and nature of planned and current priorities and projects.

"One of the primary objectives of the federal government in the area of the Information Society is to ensure affordable, equitable, and universal access to Canadian content and to ensure the preservation of this content over the long-term" (p. 3). Of course, federal departments are interested in generating revenues from the information they have added value to, so there must be guidelines in place to ensure that Canadians get access to the government information they need, while charging the private sector for the commercialization of information products. There is a fine line, but it must be established to allow the public access to Canadian content, content that they have paid for with tax dollars, while developing the economic environment surrounding information in a commercial sense. Policy guidelines must include decisions on standards, navigational tools, user-friendly interfaces, and deal with the problems associated with intellectual property and copyright legislation. One of the major problems faced by governmental departments and agencies, is the severe budgetary restraints that have been levied against them, and the pressure placed on them by Cabinet to find new ways and procedures to face the transfer to digital data in a manner that is very cost-effective. The DTF has identified tax-supported digitization; recovery of revenues through the commodification of value-added information; and the development of partnerships between federal departments and agencies with private-sector corporations, to save money.

Five areas of possible investigation by the Task Force:

  1. Funding Strategies for Digital Conversion - very important in these times of economic restraints. Increasingly, the government is looking for partnerships with private-sector companies as a way of overcoming some of these financial problems. Other non-traditional strategies need to be developed if Canada is to have a presence on the Information Highway.
  2. Selection of Materials for Digitization -- a set of criteria is needed to decide which materials will be digitized, and developed with current governmental policies, priorities, plans, and activities kept in mind. Perhaps the first step would be a survey of all federal departments' digital projects.
  3. Accessibility of Digitized Content - must include universal and equitable access to Canadian content.
  4. Common Issues of Intellectual Property - the rights of producers must be balanced with equitable and public access.
  5. The Identification of Standards and Best Practices - standards and guidelines are needed for the digitization of information and its management.

Canada. Information Highway Advisory Council. "Preparing Canada for a Digital World. Final Report." Ottawa: IHAC, September 1997. Available: http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/IHAC

"As the 21st century dawns, Canada and the world are making a profound transition that reaches into every aspect of human life. A new knowledge society is replacing the industrial society that prevailed in the developed world during most of the 19th and 20th centuries" (p.1). How Canada makes the transition will be detrimental to its national identity, its social and cultural goals, and its economic stability in the 21st century. As three years of work has ended, this remains their central conviction and conclusion. Parameters and strategies are needed to promote and develop this vision for Canada in the Information Age. The country has done much to build the Information Highway in the last five years, and has accomplished much that needed to be done, taking a leadership role in the process of developing a knowledge society and economy, a role that its leading trading partners have disputed and challenged: "If they succeed, Canadians will not achieve in the 21st century the goals that they have traditionally cherished. Nor will Canada realize the full promise of the knowledge society" (p. 2).

This final report envisions a place in the knowledge society, built by Canadians, using Canadian values and goals to provide a structure where the people of this country can work and live. There is a promise of a knowledge society that will make the physical distances between Canadians disappear, cause global parameters to shrink in size, and make "[t]he creation, manipulation, and sharing of information and knowledge become an overriding human imperative" (p. 2). The vision includes significant changes in removing obstacles related to business success; the development of economic and social factors; learning and education; voluntary action and social conscience; adequate health care; and a participation in Canadian cultural dialogue. The hope and goal is that information will be increasingly accessible, so that the decision-making process of individuals Canadians is securely established with knowledge. These new imperatives flow out of objectives created three years ago, namely: the creation of Canadian jobs through investment and innovation, having Canadian cultural identity and sovereignty reinforced, and providing universal access to digital information at reasonable cost.

This knowledge society's infrastructure will be based on computer and communication networks, with information flowing freely, and that is why Canada must continue with its policies that insist upon using the best that technology can offer, working with the private sector to develop a strong infrastructure to move Canada towards an economy using information to prosper. Currently, Canada is trailing behind other countries, which are spending more per capita on the creation of informational technologies. All will be for not, if Canadian businesses are unable to fully utilize the information infrastructure to build electronic commercial and informational services. To make this a reality, the Canadian government must create the technical and legal foundation needed.

This report encourages the federal government to work with private sector companies, before the end of 1997, in ensuring that there is a wider range of cultural content available to reflect the country's linguistic duality and distinctive cultural heritage. If Canada is to grow as a distinct society, it must make its heritage known and visible on the Information Highway, and in addition, "[t]he creation, distribution, and production of Canadian content is an important source of jobs and economic growth and a foundation for the national cultural dialogue holding us together as a country. The economic possibilities flowing out of the Information Highway represent a cultural opportunity for a stronger articulation of Canadian visions and a reinforcement of our national, regional, and local communities. This opportunity must not be lost" (p.3).

Before the end of 1997, we encourage the federal government to map out a national access strategy to ensure that Canadians have affordable and equitable access to basic services in the broadcast and telecommunications environment; to provide access to networks such as the Internet, promote Information Highway services; and to develop mechanisms for universal access in the future. How can Canadians participate in this new society, if there is not equitable access to it for all groups? Access is therefore, crucial.

Leadership is imperative: both from the public and the government. The writers of this report welcome leadership initiatives from provincial and federal governments, from individuals and private-sector strategists - all working together for a common good. Some of the issues that are important for future progress include:

  1. the advancement of networks, using partnerships based on private and public organizations.
  2. the reinvigoration of Canadian content, essential to this country's cultural unity.
  3. provision of access to the government on a universal basis.
  4. the facilitation of lifelong learning, using a forum of technologists, educators, and government officials to bring this about.
  5. the creation of standards for promoting the Information Highway, networks, and universal connectivity.
  6. using government departments and agencies as the model for users of the Information Highway. If the government takes full advantage of it, others will as well.
  7. the use of benchmarks and performance indicators to define and measure Canada's social and economic progress.
  8. a system for accountability, with a regular review of progress to be made public.

"Governments, industry, voluntary associations, community groups, and individual Canadians all have roles as drivers on the Information Highway in making the knowledge society of the 21st century a place that reflects Canadian goals, aspirations, and values. We must make the future, or it will make us. Carpe Diem!" (p. 5).

Cheverie, Joan F., and Judith F. Trump. "Changing Lanes on the Government Information Highway." The Journal of Academic Librarianship (September 1996):378-381.

In this increasing environment of electronic dissemination of government information, libraries must be prepared to become involved with developing and implementing information policy if they expect to meet the information needs of their patrons. In this shift from what was traditionally a print format, to an emphasis on electronic transmission, libraries will have to consider access, archiving, and policy issues for government information.

This article discusses these ramifications in regards to two information products that will be affected by the changes, and the implications for libraries and users.

I. The Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), is a division of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Since the early 1940s, it has published "Daily Reports", an information product that consists of wire service reports, magazine and newspaper articles in full-text, and speeches from around the world, including Western and Eastern Europe, China, Latin America, and Central Eurasia. The product is used by government analysts, businesses, and academia, to keep track of commercial developments overseas. Federal depository libraries could select the microfiche version of the "Daily Reports", but many had to purchase an index from a commercial vendor to make the information accessible to users. Other libraries chose to pay a substantial amount of money for the print version since waiting months for the microfiche did not provide good service to their patrons.

In late 1995, some of the information from FBIS and JPRS (Joint Publications Research Service, another CIA product) began to be available on the World Wide Web, through "World News Connection", whose subscription service is fee-based. Total access has been prevented by copyright negotiations with the publishers. In addition, although WNC has plans to digitize two years of content on a rolling basis, there are still discussions of what to do about archiving and preserving older material. Will it be done through CD-ROM technology, or separate databases? These are concerns well taken since all print and microfiche versions of the information were ceased in September 1996. Some of the problems with online access:

1. There have been days when no reports were available due to connectivity problems.

2. Searching techniques must be learned to facilitate use and to make sure all information needed will be obtained.

3. Users with no Internet access will have to rely on libraries to provide them with access.

4. If use is heavy in libraries, patrons will be expected to sign up for limited times, which can have an affect on search strategies and downloading.

5. Of course, libraries must have the resources available to purchase hardware/software, Internet access, and the trained staff to provide instruction if WNC is to be an efficient tool in electronic format.

II. Stat-USA/Internet -- is a fee-based electronic service of the Department of Commerce, and includes the most often selected CD-ROM product offered by the Federal Depository Library Program: the "National Trade Data Bank (NTDB) databases, as well as the "Economic Bulletin Board", GLOBUS, economic information from the "Bureau of Economic Analysis", and articles from the "Survey of Current Business." There are some benefits to using the Internet product because it is available full-text, coordinates a great amount of information for the user, and has search mechanisms which are a lot more user-friendly when compared to the CD-ROM ones. However, "[O]nly the information from the most current version of each product is maintained on the Web site, and documents are dropped from one issue to another will be lost unless libraries make other archival arrangements" (p. 379). (see note #1)

These two examples can be used to illustrate the larger issues which have an impact on access, and they are: the implications of changing national information policies, and how they can and do affect decisions and policies made at the local level.

1. National Information Policy Issues: As Charles McClure has pointed out, the information policies developed and implemented at the national level are important to understand because libraries, local decisions, and the public's access to information. As well, libraries can affect change in information policy at the local and national levels. As the authors point out, "In short, there is a synergistic relationship between libraries and federal information policy" )p. 379). Pervading the whole universe of government information and its accessibility are the pressures to downsize government and economize the federal bureaucracies, to facilitate efficiency. (see note #2)Dissemination of government information electronically may be a cost-saving alternative, but that are inherent implications that also make the process problematic. For instance, Will "Stat-USA/Internet" eventually discontinue its other formats? If that happens, what will patrons who are not connected to the Internet do? Can they rely on libraries to provide access, when not all libraries have the capabilities at the present time? (see note #3) In addition, will users still be expected to be tied to institutions such as libraries, when one of the advantages and world-changing aspects of the Internet is to breakdown geographical boundaries and facilitate a steady stream of global information? And what about copyright limitations? If copyright permission is obtained, there could be a drastic increase in user fees, and if not, the information that is obtainable through online sources will most likely be streamlined or unavailable altogether. Libraries will have to find their niche in this economic and political drama that is unfolding in many countries, because "[w]ith respect to government information, libraries have also been the "safety net" for ensured citizen access to the public information -- the very foundation of a democratic society" (p. 380).

Other Implications:

1. Although governments may save money by electronically disseminating information, it is unlikely libraries will because providing access in a networked environment is not cheap.

2. What happens to the serendipity factor of scanning the government documents stacks, if everything goes electronic? (see note #4)

3. And what will happen to information that is not considered current anymore?

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

1. This is a big problem I had not thought of before. Certainly a major disadvantage of digitized information is the archiving aspect of it. Who will preserve the information once it goes online? What role will the Federal Depository Programs have in the quest for archiving? If governments no longer keep information for very long, or allow access to only the latest available, what will that do to longitudinal studies? How will databases be protected from obsolescence when technology changes? Will information necessarily be transferable? Not on your life. And could the digitization of government information limit the availability of important avenues of knowledge in a round-about way?

2. There are also the trends of making government more like business, and the corporatization of information.

3. Where will the money come from to provide it? Will libraries have to lay -off staff or buy less books and journals to facilitate the purchase of hardware and browser software? As a proxy, I remember a library in Nepean having no Internet access, and it was the main library for the city. Or will there be yet another barrier erected in this world between the haves and have-nots? Of course, with knowledge and information the gap between has historically been filled by libraries.

Childers, Thomas. "The Quality of Reference: Still Moot after 20 Years." Journal of Academic Librarianship (May 1987): 73-74.

  1. One of the first people to conduct unobtrusive tests, Childers finds it hard to imagine how far it has come, but does not want researchers to forget it has limitations, and one must make enormous assumptions when applying the data to how reference departments function. He feels "synecdoche" is taking over unobtrusive testing of reference services. By this he means that the results of such studies are being allowed to stand for the whole of reference work, and an oversimplification of the data has occurred. These studies only concern themselves with factual, unambiguous questions, and do not reflect the whole of the reference librarian's experience behind the desk. "The bad news about investigating queries with short, factual, unambiguous answers is that, in the minds of many - especially those interested in evaluating performance - it has assumed unrealistic proportions and come to stand for the whole of the reference function, yet there is no empirical foundation for it, no literature that links performance on one kind of reference service with performance on another kind of service" (p. 74) . Childers guesses that the types of questions used in unobtrusive studies only account for one-eighth of the volume in reference departments. (see note #1)
  2. Other kinds of questions such as long factual ones are handled by reference librarians. As well, they do BI, preparation of bibliographies, electronic searching, and current awareness, along with many other duties.
  3. Childers stresses that it is indeed wrong for anyone to say that reference librarians are wrong half of the time, especially without empirical foundation.

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

  1. And that is the one of the gaps that will allow us to still champion librarians. One part should not stand for the whole.
  2. This article will help you say that just because the accuracy rate was hovering around 30%, it does not mean that reference librarians are not doing their jobs. It is just that they need to have help with one aspect of their job - better training/knowledge of government documents online, and I would concur with her, that a better understanding of the government structure as a whole is in order.

Childress, Boyd, Reference Librarian, Auburn University. "Letters to the Editor: Reference Librarians Speak Out." The Journal of Academic Librarianship 13 (Sept. 1987): 226.

He had some thoughts on the work done by Hernon and McClure:

  1. Hernon and McClure's statement that a crisis is taking place in reference departments across the country is an overstatement, and implies that a turning point of sorts is taking place. The author says that "I fail to see what makes the accuracy of reference service a turning point" (p. 226).
  2. Who is responsible? There are some librarians who do not meet the demands, do not have the abilities to do so, nor the education to properly work behind a reference desk, and have been given positions they are unsuited for by library administrators, however, that does not tell the whole story.
  3. He does not concur with Hernon and McClure that referrals to external or internal sources constitutes poor librarianship. (see note #1)
  4. Believes that no reference librarian nor anyone in the human race can be expected to know everything, nor answer all questions completely accurately. In addition, he says that since most questions do not have a definitive right or wrong answer, librarians should not be faulted.
  5. That Hernon and McClure have no insight into budget cutbacks and what they do to numbers of staff, and the comprehensiveness and currency of reference materials and resources. And librarians on the front lines do not make these decisions, administrators do.
  6. There may be problems in reference departments, but no crisis.

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

  1. It probably does because most of our questions and most questions can be answered through using resources found in most libraries. It really is passing the buck.

Christian, Eliot J. "Helping the Public Find Information: The U.S. Government Information Locator Service (GILS)." Journal of Government Information 21, No. 4, (1994): 305-314.

Important Points Made by the Author:

1. In "Technology for America's Strength, A New Direction to Build Economic Strength", 1993 by William J. Clinton and Albert Gore, Jr. state that their administration will be committed to facilitating access to government information through the use of computer networks. They believe that although there is a great amount of money spent to collect and process government information, and it is valuable, the public is unaware of it, or do not know how to access it.

2. In 1993, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) revised Circular A-130, which handles the management of information resources for the government. It now states that government agencies should supply the public with government information via new electronic technologies in a timely manner, because they provide more flexibility for access to information; improves the management of government programs; develops public awareness of electronic networks, such as the Internet; and that it facilitates the use of emerging standards for the dissemination of government information (Z39.50).

3. Agencies have also been asked to be more proactive on the part of the public when they make an information request.

4. Management of electronic records is also a growing concern for government agencies. The National Archives and Records Administration will be helping these agencies by issuing new and revised guidelines for preserving information in electronic form.

5. As a way of helping the public get access to government information, the administration is developing the Government Information Locator Service (GILS), one part of the National Information Infrastructure (NII). Of course, GILS will have to be evaluated as to its potential for meeting user needs, completeness, scope, accuracy, accessibility, user-friendliness, and timeliness. Its major advantage is that users can search numerous different aspects of government information, due to GILS' decentralized design, however, this advantage can also be a liability for those who do not have network access, knowledge of search strategies, secondary education, English literacy, or computer literacy. Of course, the role of federal depository libraries is obvious -- they along with other libraries and private sector companies will provide those users with GILS information.

6. "A locator is here defined as an information resource that identifies other information resources, describes the information available in those resources, and provides assistance in methods of obtaining the information: (p. 308). The design of GILS is attributed to the work of Charles McClure, and one of its key concepts "is that it uses network technology to support many different views across separate locators" (p. 308), and can also be accessible to intermediaries, who can provide the information through a whole range of media formats, from the telephone, to print, to very sophisticated electronic ones. As well, each agency is expected to handle their own agency-based locators, and in turn, make sure that the information is continually accessible to its pool of users. Private sector providers may also channel their information through the GILS Core (set of U.S. federal government locator records), as can GPO and NTIS, even though they will not be considered part of the GILS Core, in that they may not be free, or in the format maintained by the Core. The design also allows for supplementation by state, local, international, and foreign government agencies.

7. To facilitate the open transmission of information across the globe, GILS will adhere to both national and international standards for information and data processing, such as ANSI Z39.50 and ISO, and will use client-server architecture to allow for multiple and independent information servers concurrently.

8. Special provisions, such as hierarchical browsing will allow users to navigate among GILS locators. (Won't that bypass the poor indexing of government documents?)

9. Locator records will be available in many forms, including USMARC, HTML, and SUTRS (Simple Unstructured Text Record Syntax).

Christensen, John O., Larry D. Benson, H. Julene Butler, Blaine H. Hall, and Don H. Howard. "An Evaluation of Reference Desk Service." College & Research Libraries 50 (July 1989): 468-483.

Brigham Young University Library conducted a five-part management study to find out the quality of service provided by students and departmental assistants; how adequate the training program was; and how effective their service was for referring patrons to subject specialists. Paraprofessionals and students were working the reference desk since 1986, because it had been determined that most questions asked at the desk could be answered by them, with a referral system to subject specialists for more difficult questions. They used five different methods to ascertain the quality of reference service:

  1. Patron surveys - One hundred patrons were interviewed when they were out of view of the staff member who had helped them with their inquiry.
  2. Reference Assistant surveys - All students working at the reference desk were asked to fill out a questionnaire regarding their background, training, job responsibilities, and their opinion on amount of support they received from department assistants and specialists.
  3. Department Assistant surveys - All were expected to answer questions on their job responsibilities, work environment, reference training, education, supervision of students, and the role of the professional librarians.
  4. Subject Specialist surveys - The eighteen reference librarians and subject specialists answered questions about the quality of reference service they perceived was given to patrons by students and departmental assistants, their training, and their job responsibilities.
  5. Unobtrusive Question test - seventy-five questions were asked of the students, fifteen of which required negotiation.

Since the focus of the study was to find out the quality of reference service provided by the student assistants, the researchers used information from all five methods to evaluate it. Here are some of their findings:

  1. The students had some problems with the negotiation of escalator questions; had problems developing search strategies; 25% of the questions were only partially answered; only 36% of the seventy-five questions were answered correctly by the student assistants; of the 17 questions that needed referral to a subject specialist, 65% were referred, and 35% left unanswered.
  2. Some of the factors influencing the outcome: students felt isolated from the subject specialists; insufficient time in which to help a patron, and in particular, time for follow-up; emotional climate between students and subject specialists could be improved; and lack of training in many crucial areas, and the frustrations associated with it.
  3. The professional librarians believed that the quality of reference service is negatively effected by having non-professionals at the desk. They also felt that their professional abilities were being reduced because they could not monitor patron demands, stay on top of new reference tools and sources, monitor the reference assistants, or receive the numbers of referrals they believed were warranted in the library. Reference service was also seen as a way subject specialists fulfill their collection development duties and carry out library instruction.
  4. By removing professional librarians from the reference desk, serious problems have been created in the reference department at the Lee Library of Brigham Young University.

Cornwell, Gary T. "The Dissemination of Federal Government Information: Prospects for the Immediate Future." Journal of Government Information 23, No. 3 (1996): 299-306.

The evolving electronic environment has serious ramifications for the dissemination of government information and has seriously undermined the FDLP, as most federal government information is forecasted to be electronic by the close of fiscal year 1998. This will greatly affect the historical role that the depository program has always enjoyed, and will change it drastically, impacting the public and their libraries; how agencies disseminate their information electronically; and how the FDLP will restructure itself to exist within the new parameters.

1. Libraries and the Public: Congress has clear intentions to reduce the amount of money given to the federal depository program, with an aim to making it more efficient. They believe that CD-ROM products and the Internet will be integral to their plan, not necessarily realizing the extra burdens that it will place on libraries and their staff. Essentially, the public's access to government information will be impacted. This is clearly seen if one takes the example of classes of students trying to find census reports. If paper copies exist, most would likely photocopy what they need and pass it to their classmate to use, but if a library can only offer the Internet and by law must provide access to the public, what are their options? Will they have to download and print off required data? This may be okay for certain documents that are used on a continual basis, but can staff print, bind, catalogue, barcode, and find a place for everything? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of electronic dissemination? The value is that the information is being archived. Download, put on disc, and offer workstation access to it? This option is also problematic because some topics such as gun control can accrue ten or more hearings that will have to be found item by item, and place considerable strain on the staff and the availability of workstations. To restrict the amount of time patrons can use workstations is indirect opposition to the fundamental philosophy of access to government information. Download, put on hard disk and allow it to be copied? This option takes care of workstations being tied up, but it means that users must have access to a library's hard disk -- something that is not advisable. Patrons must then provide their own computers to look at the files, which again means the intent of the FDLP is not being met. Or simply show patrons how to access the appropriate information on the Internet for retrieving? This option allows for no archival system, and is labor intensive for staff, and causes considerable strai n on equipment. Of course, if patrons are shown how to navigate the Internet to search out information, they do become network literate. (see note #1)

2. Agency Dissemination of Electronic Information -- many federal government agencies do not believe the FDLP to be the best way to offer their information to the public in a timely and efficient manner. They can post information on their own individual websites, making it accessible to depository libraries as well as the public, and can bypass the depository program altogether. Therefore, "if agencies are going to continue (or in some cases choose for the first time) to disseminate their information through the GPO, the role and philosophy of the GPO must evolve from its traditional role as information printer/disseminator to that of a proactive and interactive player in the life cycle of government information. Libraries provide a critical link between information and the user and the GPO must provide a similar link between agencies and libraries" (p. 302). Since they have questioned the effectiveness of the GPO to handle their paper and microfiche products, what will that mean for electronic information? This is especially relevant when one considers that the transition to electronic dissemination means that libraries lose their fundamental role as archivists: another reason that agencies used them in the first place. That is the gap that the GPO must fill, but they believe that the GPO is not really interested in making changes, in a time when change is imperative for everyone. The GPO must be able to offer the access software to disseminate agency information; archiving; indexing and cataloguing; and mechanisms to alert librarians of new resources. Even GPO Access was initiated by those outside the GPO, which prefers the status quo. However, the library community did respond with their report "Alternatives for Restructuring the Depository Library Program", as well as through work done by the Dupont Circle Group and the Chicago Conference on the Future of Government Information. (I will try to get some of these reports)

3. FDLP Survival in an Electronic Environment -- if the depository system is to continue in an electronic environment wherein libraries will be expected to offer access, but receive nothing in return, what will make it a viable organization? 1.) no-fee access to all agency sites, 2.) have agency limitations removed, 3.) libraries must be able to provide access in anyway they can, 4.) clear service expectations must be put in place so that reference librarians understand the level of the assistance expected from them, 5.) the GPO should guarantee archival access to depository libraries, as well as a forum for training, 6.) libraries can no longer be the sole agents for change; the GPO must become involved in the changing life cycle of government information dissemination.

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

1. That is assuming that the librarians have acquired the skills to navigate the Internet, but many have not had the training.

Crowley, Terence. "Half-Right Reference: Is It True?" RQ 25 (Fall 1985): 59-68.

The author reviews major studies of unobtrusive reference tests, which really began with studies done by himself and Thomas Childers in the 1960s. Before that time, it was always assumed that there were no problems with the accuracy in reference work.

  1. One of Crowley's first unobtrusive studies was to determine if there was any difference between accuracy rates of medium-sized libraries with good funding, and those of medium-sized libraries with poor funding in New Jersey. He found that no differences were apparent based on budget, and found that 54.2% of the questions were answered correctly. The other thing that came out of the study was that librarians have problems with questions involving current events because some change had occurred in the information contained in standard reference sources. (see note #1) This was his doctoral project. Study was conducted in 1967.
  2. Childers (also doctoral work) - retested the study done by Crowley in New Jersey, using twice the number of libraries, twice the questions (with a wider range), a sensitive set of measurements to determine completeness and accuracy, and sophisticated statistical analyses. He also decided to use telephone questions due to his large sample size. "His overall accuracy score was 55 to 64 percent, depending on the scale employed" (p.61). Study was conducted in 1969.
  3. Geraldine King - her study was designed to determine the accuracy of telephone reference service in seven divisions of the University of Minnesota library system. It was the first of its kind to look at telephone reference service at a major ARL library. She found that little reference interviewing took place with the proxies, and that only 60% of the questions were answered correctly.
  4. Childers - in 1978, Childers published the results of another study he did involving 57 libraries in Suffolk County, New York in which every library was asked twenty questions. It was the largest study done at the time. The findings verified earlier studies by providing an accuracy rate between 48 and 58%. The other important thing it did was advance the technique of unobtrusive testing because four question types were used: 1.) factual questions 2.) it tested the ability of librarians to negotiate questions and their willingness to do so 3.) how well they provided patrons with citations to documents 4.) how well they could provide a patron with a book.
  5. Myers and Jirjees - Marcia Myers studied forty libraries representing 361 public and private "non-black" institutions in the Southwest, and found that there was an accuracy rate of 50.4%. She used sophisticated analyses, and it was the first time a study showed that reference librarian performance in academic libraries was comparable to that provided by public librarians. Shortly after, Jassim Jirjees used proxies to ask thirty-five questions in five New Jersey academic libraries. He used some of the same questions developed for Crowley's study, which made it clear that with the same questions asked at different times, there was a low rate of consistency. He also logged the number of calls it took to get a response, the time it took a librarian to answer, the quoting of sources, attitude of librarians, and the sex of librarian. These variables had never been reported in prior studies.
  6. Weech and Goldhor - took Childer's recommendation that a study should be done comparing unobtrusive with obtrusive testing. They used five Illinois public libraries in which to undertake their study, and found an accuracy rate of 70% for the unobtrusive, and 85% for the obtrusive. "The effect of knowing a test was being administered was thus found to be significant, though less than might be expected" (p. 63).
  7. McClure and Hernon - Using government documents questions for their study, the researchers used library school students as proxies in 17 academic libraries in the Northwest and Southwest. Twenty questions were used, half in person and half over the telephone. They found that the Northwest libraries answered the questions correctly 49% of the time, while only 20% of the time in the Southwest, with a combined average of 37%. Other interesting findings were "[t]elephone questions were twice as likely to be completely answered in the Northwest, 3.5 times as likely in the Southwest" (p. 63). The Northwest libraries had approximately four times the budget dollars, volumes, and professional librarians as the libraries in the Southwest, but were fairly equal when it came to numbers of document paraprofessionals and librarians.
  8. Maryland - this study dwarfed all that had come before, unobtrusively surveying each of the 60 public libraries in the system using forty questions in each. The accuracy score was 54.9% for correct answers, and 73.4% if directions or provision of a book were also counted as correct.
  9. The author concludes by saying: "Until librarians deal effectively as a profession with the many and seemingly endless sources of error in reference work, we will remain passive observers of popular culture. Some of us will provide timely, appropriate, and consistently accurate information, but the institution in which we work will not be fulfilling its potential role in the information age" (p. 67).

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

  1. This concurs with what I said in my June 7th e-mail to you. That is why it is imperative for government documents librarians to use the Internet sites because they contain the latest information available on many topics. One only has to remember the CRTC question, which could only be answered correctly using the Internet.

Daniel, Evelyn H. " The Effects of Identity, Attitude, and Priority." Journal of Academic Librarianship (May 1987): 76-78.

Some observations made by the author:

  1. Professional apathy was one of the findings coming out of Hernon and McClure's unobtrusive studies. The author finds it difficult to synthesize this characteristic with the eagerness and zeal she sees in the students she teaches in library school. Is there something in the attitudinal makeup of working librarians which causes this behavior or is it some aspect of the job that makes this so?
  2. She agrees with Hernon and McClure that all the questions asked in their study could be answered by using standard government sources available in any reference department, so she wonders if the problem lies with the uninteresting aspect of them, stating, "It occurred to me that perhaps the questions were not intrinsically interesting enough to challenge the mettle or engage the interest of the librarian. Are librarians more willing to discover the dimensions of a craps table than the total production of bituminous coal in 1868? … Do we prefer the charm of trivial pursuit to the honest-but-pedestrian factual answer?"(p. 77).
  3. The average time librarians spent helping Hernon's proxies was three to five minutes, but the amount of time spent might not be such a problem as it seems because rough statistics kept in reference departments seem to point to the fact that short factual questions should be answered in a short period of time. This is especially true when one considers highly experienced librarians who can find answers quickly, and do not want to leave others waiting at the desk.
  4. How can competence levels be increased if Hernon and McClure have found they do not improve with one-shot training sessions? Is it an internal, individualized determination to get better? Certainly, the skills needed to help a large variety of users are taught at library school, so an interested librarian should be able to build competence levels if they are determined to be a professional information provider.
  5. Since experienced craftspeople have gone the way of the dinosaur and been replaced by computers, and since there is a marked deterioration of products flooding the marketplace, "[o]ur attitudes as library/information people reflect our surroundings. The erosion of service and the erosion of quality in the products that we use in our daily lives may have affected adversely our attitude toward the provision of quality reference service" (p. 77).
  6. How much time is time enough? What will it take to increase accuracy rates to 80%? Are our efforts being utilized in the best sense if we spend more to increase accuracy rates for factual questions? Which professionals can claim they are right more than half the time? Mechanics?
  7. Were the low accuracy rates due to an overabundance of paraprofessionals on the desk? (see note #1)
  8. I think Daniel makes an excellent point when she tries to get at the reasons why libraries do not seem that worried about being wrong 45% of the time. She says that historically, libraries were not that involved in fact provision, and that it only became an offered convenience for patrons. She theorizes that fact provision by librarians could become a thing of the past, a short stay in the history of libraries and be replaced by expert systems or the like. (see note #2)
  9. As far as studies done using unobtrusive testing, professionals working with the public should have no problem with being observed and tested for skill.
  10. The findings of Hernon and McClure are disturbing, but they could be a reflection of the prevailing societal attitudes that are so evident around us, or from the fact that answering short unambiguous questions has not had a long history in libraries?

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

  1. I would say that some of our results have been marred by paraprofessionals, but it probably works in our favour because we can say that is one reason why the numbers are so low and all the more reason why libraries should spend more money on hiring professional librarians.
  2. Do you think her concept is particularly analogous to what the Quebec government is doing with the kiosks?

Dewdney, Patricia, and Catherine Sheldrick Ross. "Flying a Light Aircraft: Reference Service Evaluation from a User's Viewpoint." RQ 34, No. 2 (Winter 1994): 217-30.

  1. Using students from the University of Western Ontario's Graduate School for Library Science as proxies, the authors undertook to evaluate reference service from the user's viewpoint. Rather than just using accuracy rates in which to make the evaluation, the authors used Joan Durrance's measure of a 'willingness to return' to the librarian, since ultimately, the user must be the judge of good or bad service.
  2. The other reason they decided upon 'willingness to return' instead of accuracy was because rates of accuracy are only conducive to measuring success rates of factual questions.
  3. The users asked questions that were important to them when visiting their hometowns.
  4. Results were similar for both academic and public libraries.
  5. The results were: 1.) about 18% of users were highly satisfied with their reference encounter. 2.) 15.6% reported that they were highly unsatisfied. 3.) When scores were collapsed into low, medium, and high ratings, less than 41.6% expressed high satisfaction, while 35.1% had a low satisfaction level. 4.) Asked whether they would return to the same staff member, 59.7% stated they would, 27.3% said they would not, while 10% were not sure.
  6. There was a strong relationship between willingness to return to the librarian and an overall positive experience, with factors such as librarian behavior and the degree to which the librarian answered their questions.
  7. Proxies were also asked to comment on how well they perceived the librarian to understand their question, with only 2% reporting that the librarian did not seem to fully understand what they were asking. 44.5% said that there seemed to be a good understanding on the part of the librarian. One thing that was evident from the written accounts was that often the librarians involved did not conduct a reference interview, but "[u]sers apparently did not diagnose the librarian's incomplete understanding of their information need as the reason why they did not get the specific answer to their question…" (p. 223). 55% of the librarians chose not to conduct a reference interview.
  8. Given the results that 40.3% of the proxies would not be willing to return, this study is in agreement with the multitude of research which states that patrons receive incorrect information 45% of the time. Therefore, "[i]t seems that no matter which outcome measure is used - accuracy, user satisfaction, or willingness to return - and no matter what type of library is observed, reference service is still not meeting the goals of effective information service in 40 to 45 percent of cases" (p. 223).
  9. Of the 72 proxies involved in this study, only 15 reported knowing that they had been helped by a professional librarian. A problem with name tags is still plaguing the profession.
  10. Some of the library staff who answered questions for the proxies asked good open-ended questions to elicit what their information need was, but only 45% of the proxies were asked one or more questions during the encounter. In 18 of the 42 cases where the reference interview was dispensed with, the first thing the librarian did was check the OPAC to do a keyword search, and for some, this is an automatic response. If nothing of use came up on the computer, many librarians did not seem to know what the next step should be; it was as if the catalog encompassed all the reference sources available.
  11. As far as librarians providing patrons with a call number or when they simply suggest a source and leave them on their own to search for answers, the results are far from encouraging. In 42.1% of the cases, this unmonitored referral led to information which was not helpful. When users are not properly interviewed and then sent off on their own, and with little instruction, there is a high probability of failure.
  12. What is so disturbing is that many of these problems can be resolved if librarians do some follow-up. Gers and Seward have said that the follow-up question may be the most important thing a librarian can do because it can make up for incorrect information provision. Follow-up questions can make the user's experience a satisfactory one and prevent a whole series of events from taking place. (see note #1)
  13. OOPS!!! The authors make the point I have just written out below and refuse to delete. In their study, some of the proxies ended up asking three different librarians for help, and that certainly is a drain on human resources.
  14. Communication training and help with building problem-solving skills seems to be in order for librarians working in reference departments
  15. And librarians need to learn how to provide good referrals, not simply suggestions

Ideas, Thoughts, and Notes

  1. From everything I have read so far, it seems as if the lack of follow-up is really draining on resources because if you have any real urgency for information, it is likely you will return to the desk for more help. What happens is that the librarian in question has already run off with someone else and the patron has to begin all over again with a different librarian, who in fact could be helping someone else. In one of the other articles, perhaps the Ian Douglas one, he says that for factual questions, librarians should make sure they provide the answer in the first round, stopping a series of events from talking place, including causing frustration in the patron. Follow-up can also make up for no reference interview.
  2. The other problem with librarians using no identifying tags is that patrons can be at a loss to know whether the information or instructions they receive are in fact, the best available. Of course, the public may not even realize that people other than professional librarians work reference desks.

Douglas, Ian. "Reducing Failures in Reference Services." RQ, Vol. 28 (Fall 1988), pp. 94-101.

Many criticisms have been made against using unobtrusive testing for reference evaluation. Ian Douglas discusses some of them, and gives some insight into how corrective action is more likely to reduce failures at the reference desk.

  1. Douglas makes the point that the 50-60% accuracy rates reported in unobtrusive testing are not acceptable due in part to the fact that only short factual questions have been used to test librarians. He feels this does not reflect the majority of work done by reference librarians and should therefore, not be used to evaluate overall performance. (See note #1)
  2. The fact that questions have been re-used from study to study makes Douglas even more suspect of results, stating that "as all of the studies except one ( my insert -- done by Geraldine King and Rachel Berry of the University of Minnesota) involved a number of libraries, it is likely that the investigators consciously or unconsciously selected a set of questions to discriminate between the "quality" of service given by the libraries involved. When testing is done to discriminate between the various candidates, the ideal test results in a mean score of 50 percent and a large variance in the results of individual candidates. The attempt to discriminate between the quality of reference service provided by various libraries could account in large part for the uniformity of the results" (p. 96).
  3. Douglas believes that one of the major drawbacks to unobtrusive studies is they provide little in the way of how change can be implemented, with results being so limited that it is impossible to figure out where weak areas of service exist, and if the problem lies with reduced staff, inappropriate tools, with staff, or inappropriate policies for the handling of certain types of questions. (see note #3)
  4. The author also points out that the difficulties in preparing unobtrusive studies, and the costs involved in using them on an ongoing basis, hamper their value as a way of evaluating reference service on an ongoing basis. Weech and Goldhor have done studies which compare unobtrusive studies with obtrusive studies, and believe that since obtrusive testing is cheaper and easier to undertake, it is probably the better bet for most libraries, especially if they want to have some control and do evaluation regularly. (see note #4)
  5. First mode of failure is giving wrong information. It is sometimes difficult to detect, or even impossible. Douglas says we must assume that librarians are not aware that they are doing so, but is the most troublesome because librarians often have no way of contacting the patron if the mistake is uncovered. Research by the author seems to point to more wrong answers given when a question involves a time element, such as who is the president of such and such an organization? If librarians are aware of the fact that they do provide outright wrong answers to questions of this sort, they ar